Thanks Osiris II for the sources They are appreciated._________________[img]http://images.google.com/images?q=tbn:ygpdGun0X_wJ:www.temoata.org/temoata/lotus.jpg[/img]
how beautiful the lotus flower is! selected 4-4-04

You can dang those multiple spelllings Ramsekh! They all refer to the wife/widow of Tutankhamun. _________________[img]http://images.google.com/images?q=tbn:ygpdGun0X_wJ:www.temoata.org/temoata/lotus.jpg[/img]
how beautiful the lotus flower is! selected 4-4-04

"I must admit that the evidence that backs up the marriage of Ankhesenamun and Ay is highly sceptical. The actual ring proclaiming it is, in my memory lost somewhere and thus cannot be studied in more depth. On the other hand the marriage would have been unusual, even for Ancient Egyptian standards. "

One of the rings has been found - it is in the Agyptisches Museum in Berlin - and is in their store, never placed on display, apparently the blue glaze has faded and it is now white, see page 187 of Bob Brier - Murder of Tutankhamen, BCA books, CN2694, second reprint, 1999.

I have alway theorized that she was murdered.She was at any rate probably not alive by the time Horemheb assumed the throne if she had been do you think she would have allowed him to do things like appropiate her husbands monuments or obliterate all trace of her father.I have always supported the murder theory.

Hi Lady Neferankh, welcome again!
My own beliefs regarding Ankhesenamun again goes against accepted theories of her. It is my belief that she married Ramesses I, and it is this marriage that allows Ramesses I to achieve the throne. Not because he had a son, and grandson and that pleased Horemheb. i note that Ramesses I wife's name is Satre which translates into the daughter of the Sun God. Considering that Ankhesenamun as the daughter of one Pharaoh, the wife of another, granddaughter of Amenohotep III she would fit that description better than anyother women. i believe that Seti was her son, and Ramesses II was her grandson.

As for Horemheb's destruction of the Amarna history that is now becoming another of the many Amarna theories that are hitting the discarded floor. Yes, he did tear down the one temple of Aten at Karnak, but it was in the way of his own planned work. But it wasn't unsual for new kings to remove prior kings work that stood in the way of the newer king. The White Chapel of Amenhotep I is one example i can think of.

Today more scholars Lady Neferankh are accepting that it was Ramesses I, Seti I, and Ramesses II that began the true crimialization of Akhenaten. Here again, i see more the hand of a woman bent on destroying everything that might remind her of a past life filled with pain and memories than a man's destruction of a dead rivial.

Then there is the fact that it appears that neither Ay, nor Horemheb had a true Queen. Tiye, and Mutnodjmet the common born wives of Ay, and Horemheb didn't share in the royal tombs of their husbands signifing that they were dead prior to those tombs being prepared. While both women are called Queens by their husbands, it apparently was most likely that they became queens after death. Which leds me to ask in a country that required duality in almost everything why not with these Kings without Queens. My answer is because Ankhesenamun didn't drop dead as so many scholars like to think she did but continued.

In final consieration if my theory is right, we have Ramesses I marrying Ankhesenamun between year 1 and year 4 of Ay. Which would give us a Seti of the correct age to assume the throne as he did.

I agree very much! I've always thought so myself, and in speaking with my grandmother who agrees as well, it fits nicely._________________
*Born in Cairo and named after the Queen*

But I think if we look at the fact that she was supposed married to Ay?
Then I think she was killed. Be cause this would fit the plans of
Horemheb prefect.

He was after the Throne him self and to get it he had to do some murders
first... When he Killed King Tut it was his plan to let Ay claim the throne
and later murder Ankhesenamun. Why murder her? easy to explain
if she where to have a Son with Ay then this son would be next to claim the throne and that would not fit in to the plans of Horemheb
so he had to murder her to be sure that he could claim the throne for him self with out to be known as the killer he truly was.

Then who is the wife to Ramses I
She could of cause be a doter of Horemheb this should explain the
name.. He had to cover his tracks so I think to give her a name
like the one Ramses wife has would be explained in this theory of me

But if someone needed a Prince to claim the Throne after Akhenaton dead
it would be Nefertiti and I think it was her who sent for the Prince and that
Horemheb and Ay hade him killed so she would not be able to claim it

Sekhmet I luv your theory. I also have a little something to add to it as well.
You know when Ankhaseamun wrote the letter to the hittite king? and we know how soon after the prince came to Egypt, well what if in fact, this prince was murdered like so many say. I'm sure a lot of people look at Horemheb as being the culprit for this. Though since reading your theory, I now see how it could have been Rameses I who would also be upset by this? maybe I'm jumping ahead of myself though. _________________

[quote]I thought I thought Ankhsenamun was just a fiction mistress in the mummy?

I only know of Tutankhamun's wife, Ankhesenpaaten/Ankhesenpaamun

Quote:

Actually it was 'Ancksunamun' who featured in 'The Mummy' films but they seem to have messed up the name. I'm sure they meant to say 'Ankhsenamun', who was the wife of Tut. 'Ancksunamen' was a fictional character in the Mummy films but her character in the film has no connection with the real life wife of Tut.

tut's wife was originally known as 'Ankhesenpaaten' but not I think 'Ankhesenpaamun '.

Originally posted by Sekmet

You can dang those multiple spelllings Ramsekh! They all refer to the wife/widow of Tutankhamun.

Quote:

He he!

Originally posted by Claude II

Then who is the wife to Ramses I
She could of cause be a doter of Horemheb this should explain the
name..

Quote:

Ramses I was not that much younger than Horemheb. Any daughter of Horemheb would not be worth more than any other noble young woman until Hoemheb became pharaoh and by the time this happened Ramses already had a son and grandchildren. Ramses married Sitre a woman who was probably of his own noble, but not royal, social circle, long before Horemheb came to the throne. If Sitre was royal she probably would have born the title 'King's Daughter' which she didn't.

There are some who think there may have been 2 Queens named Sitre.
One would be a wife of Sety I and the other would have unknown connections to the 19th dynasty.

I must say that I personally prefer the Tia=Sitre explanation (it's the cleanest)

We just had a discussion about this on another forum. I thought some of you might find this interesting.

This is a quote of something I posted there:

The following appears in Section B, Part XI, The Family and Career if Tia, by Jacobus van Dijk. (in The Tomb of Tia and Tia by G.T. Martin et.al)

Part of the problem comes from the 400-year stela on which the wife of Ramesses I and mother of Sety I is said to be a woman called Tia.

The idea that Sit-Re was a wife and not the mother of Sety I goes all the way back to Maspero. Sit-Re appears twice on Sety's monuments.
She is shown in the chapel devoted to the cult of Sety I in Abydos. Statues of Sety I, Ramesses I and the King's Wife Sat-Re are depicted.
Sat-Re also appears in Sety I's tomb in the Valley of the Kings where she is called the King's Great Wife whom he loves. Her relationship with Isis, i.e. the wife of the deceased Osiris-King Sety, is stressed.
This could suggest that Sitre is a wife of Sety I.

The title of King's Mother only appears in the tomb the Valley of the Queens, but there is no evidence equating this Queen with the Sit-Re depicted in Abydos or in the Valley of the Kings.

Van Dijk also mentions that the absence of the title of King's Mother in the Abydos and Theban monuments is striking considering that several Queens in the New Kingdom are only known from monuments erected by their sons (including Queen-Mother Tuya). So if the woman named Sitre depicted in Abydos and VoK was a Queen-Mother, then she may have been expected to carry that title.

So, people like Maspero and van Dijk would argue that there are 2 Queen Sitres. One is a Great Royal Wife of Sety I, who was the highest ranking Queen during the reign of Sety I. This would mean that Tuya was a lower ranking Queen and only became important after her son came to power.
This means we also have a Queen-Mother Sit-Re who must be the mother of some other New Kingdom Pharaoh.

Others like Bietak and Dodson would suggest that Tia changed her name to Sit-Re once Sety I became King. So that her full name would be Tia-Sitre.
Dodson argues in his Royal families book that the name Tia-Sitre is also borne by one of Ramesses II's daughters so that this may have become a family name.

Dodson argues in his Royal families book that the name Tia-Sitre is also borne by one of Ramesses II's daughters so that this may have become a family name.

Yes I have Dodson's book but by the time I got to the 19th Dynasty I was virtually asleep:-) Not because its boring, brilliant book, but because I had read through it from cover to cover without many breaks:-) Missed a princess called Tia-Sitre so will go and have another look. Royal women are much more interesting than the men:-)

I posted a couple of questions in the Ancient Egypt forum but noone replied. Maybe I 'll have more luck if I post them here:

1)I have read a couple of articles stating that Ankhesenamun ended up marrying 4 Pharaohs. Is this info derived from Ancient Egyptian texts? Could please someone give me some reliable sources or/and bibliography?

2)I have also read Ankhe's personal belongings were not found next to Tut's in his tomb. But then I also remember reading that some of the items found belonged to both? Can anyone shed some light on this one please?

I guess the most personal of personal belongings of Ankh. were in Tut's tomb--the two fetus' found were more than likely hers.
Although her image is on several items, to the best of my knowledge, there was nothing that is known to be her personal belongings found in the tomb.
As for her marrying 4 pharaohs, besides Tut all of the others are theories only. There is a ring that mentions her in a marriage to Aye, but, unfortunately, it is quite damaged and they are not sure if that is a correct reading. Theories have her married to her father, Aye, Smenenkhara and possibly Ramses I. With Tut, that's 5--1 assured, 4 possible.

Thank you Osiris. Yes, I know about the ring, I remember reading about it in the Bob Brier book- also heard about it in a documentary.

Regarding those theories about the other marriages, what are they based on?

As for Tut's tomb, was it standard practice that the personal belongings of a King's Chief Wife would be buried alongside her husband's? And how about the mummies? Were Royal Couples buried in the same tomb? Forgive my ignorance, I 'm just starting out as an Egyptology enthusiast.

This is taken from Wikipedia and is the most accepted theory:
Ankhesenpaaten, also known as Ankhesenamun, was the third of six known daughters of the Pharaoh Akhenaten by his wife Nefertiti. She is believed to have been married first to her own father, by whom she was the mother of the princess Ankhesenpaaten Tasherit when she was twelve. After her father's death and a short marriage to Smenkhkare, she became the wife of Tutankhaten. Following their marriage, the couple honored the gods of the restored religion by changing their names to Tutankhamun and Ankhesenamun. Despite numerous attempts, the couple only had two stillborn daughters. When Tutankhamun died, Ankhesenamun married to Ay and died during or shortly after his reign

There are several others, though. One subject, which we discussed here, was the possiblity of Ankh. changing her name to Sitre, and marrying Ramses I, but there is no concret evidence to support this theory.
In so far as Royal Couples being buried together, it seems to have been at the Pharaoh's wishes--sometimes they were, more often they were not.

Having the personal items of the Great Royal Wife entombed with her husband's mummy? Doubtful. It would be kind of "I know you like your jewels, but they have to be with your husband's mummy!" Not too logical!

Hey, don't apologize for asking questions. I admire that, really. It's one of the best ways to learn facts! Anytime I can help you understand (to my way of thinking, anyway) just holler!